Around Hockey XXIII (All Non-Jackets Hockey talk in here)

[majormajor]

I'm just glad Vegas is out because f*** those silver spoon-fed jerkasses who've never had to know suffering.

Otherwise, I'm kind of short on motivations to root for teams at this point.

Simple.

You root against the team with a $98 million dollar cap hit that employs this asshole.



I would be very happy to see either the Habs or Islanders win it. They've got the long suffering fans to feel good for.

 

[Monk]

Simple.

You root against the team with a $98 million dollar cap hit that employs this asshole.



I would be very happy to see either the Habs or Islanders win it. They've got the long suffering fans to feel good for.

This is the summary of my playoffs viewing from here on out.

 

[rotsbu]

That's false. It was noted at several different points in the season, on Canadian broadcasts, that the Habs looked more like a playoff team. Elliotte Friedman has said it multiple times himself. You simply don't hire Edmundson, Chiarot, Perry, and Staal to win you games in the regular season, because they're not going to help you there.

What's genuinely farcical, is to say that they just happened to catch all of these teams slumping, as if the Habs had nothing to do with that. The Knights sure weren't slumping in their prior series, and the Jets looked great vs the Oilers. Good defensive teams make their opponents look inept, it's how it goes. I guess you thought the '95 Devils just happened to catch 4 slumping teams in a row?

Not to pile on Cyclones too much here, but these were the very same Knights who beat the regular-season-world-beating Avs pretty handily. Oh, and remember, how much of the post-series talk after that one has been how the Avs need to tweak they roster to be more suited for the playoffs...

 

[CBJWerenski8]

Simple.

You root against the team with a $98 million dollar cap hit that employs this asshole.



I would be very happy to see either the Habs or Islanders win it. They've got the long suffering fans to feel good for.

But..but.. I like Savard

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

Give Danault whatever he wants. You get a center plus a replacement for Foligno’s favorite.

 

[EspenK]

I'm for the Bolts. Skill over muck it up.

 

[Fro]

Posted up at Sparkman Wharf by the arena....I hope isles win now

 

[majormajor]

Give Danault whatever he wants. You get a center plus a replacement for Foligno’s favorite.

Sometimes I wonder if we're going to regret paying big money to this guy that needs help to get points.

And then I watch the way he plays and I think I don't even care if he scores, I want this guy on my team.

 

[CBJWerenski8]

Sometimes I wonder if we're going to regret paying big money to this guy that needs help to get points.

And then I watch the way he plays and I think I don't even care if he scores, I want this guy on my team.

unless jarmo thinks he can turn the ship around in 2 years or less, don’t bother with danault. And I love the player. If we wanted to play 5+ million for a 3C we should have just kept Wenny, and yes danault is twice the player he was.

 

[punk_o_holic]

Looks like Savard vs Anderson

 

[DJA]

No ones gonna clean up the ping pong paddles during the celebration?

 

[CBJWerenski8]

Looks like Savard vs Anderson

And McElhinney!

 

[majormajor]

unless jarmo thinks he can turn the ship around in 2 years or less, don’t bother with danault. And I love the player. If we wanted to play 5+ million for a 3C we should have just kept Wenny, and yes danault is twice the player he was.

So anything that doesn't single-handedly make the Jackets a good team is something we shouldn't do? I'm genuinely asking, it's complicated.

 

[CBJWerenski8]

So anything that doesn't single-handedly make the Jackets a good team is something we shouldn't do? I'm genuinely asking, it's complicated.

I just don't think throwing 5-6 years at 5+ million at a 28 year old is a smart strategy if you're rebuilding. He's a good player and anyone could use him, but is that the smartest use of cap space at the start of a rebuild?

If Jarmo thinks he can get this team competing in 2-3 years and believes Danault can be productive well into his early-mid 30s, then by all means. But I'm not sure of that myself.

 

[majormajor]

I just don't think throwing 5-6 years at 5+ million at a 28 year old is a smart strategy if you're rebuilding. He's a good player and anyone could use him, but is that the smartest use of cap space at the start of a rebuild?

$5.5m x 5 or even $5.5m x 6 are both good deals to my mind. Is a guy like Danault going to forget how to play by the time he is 31 or 32? His mental game is why he is good. I do start to shy away from seven year deals though, maybe a $5m x 7.

 

[Halfboard]

And McElhinney!

Good on Andy & Savy………happy for ‘em

 

[CBJWerenski8]

$5.5m x 5 or even $5.5m x 6 are both good deals to my mind. Is a guy like Danault going to forget how to play by the time he is 31 or 32? His mental game is why he is good. I do start to shy away from seven year deals though, maybe a $5m x 7.

I'm not worried about his IQ eroding, I'm worried about his skating going away and him not being able to keep up. He'll always be a useful player but maybe in the way Dubinsky was in his final few years here when he was clearly unable to keep up offensively anymore but still able to contribute in other ways. But do we want another Dubinsky like contract?

 

[majormajor]

I'm not worried about his IQ eroding, I'm worried about his skating going away and him not being able to keep up. He'll always be a useful player but maybe in the way Dubinsky was in his final few years here when he was clearly unable to keep up offensively anymore but still able to contribute in other ways. But do we want another Dubinsky like contract?

Not another Dubinsky, no. They'll have to do some homework and make more serious projections about how they expect Danault to age. But I'll say just at a glance that he doesn't have the playstyle that obviously leads to early declines, the way Dubinsky did.

 

[Cyclones Rock]

That's false. It was noted at several different points in the season, on Canadian broadcasts, that the Habs looked more like a playoff team. Elliotte Friedman has said it multiple times himself. You simply don't hire Edmundson, Chiarot, Perry, and Staal to win you games in the regular season, because they're not going to help you there.

What's genuinely farcical, is to say that they just happened to catch all of these teams slumping, as if the Habs had nothing to do with that. The Knights sure weren't slumping in their prior series, and the Jets looked great vs the Oilers. Good defensive teams make their opponents look inept, it's how it goes. I guess you thought the '95 Devils just happened to catch 4 slumping teams in a row?

A team which wins 24 of 56 games is not "built" for much of anything. The Devils won 3 Cups. This Habs team is a lot more likely to be like the 1982 Canucks and 1981 North Stars-mediocre teams who had a nice run and then got crushed in the finals by a vastly superior dynasty in the NY Islanders. Tampa vs. Montreal has the same feel.

If you don't think Winnipeg played like absolute rubbish vs. Montreal, I don't know what to say. Stone got shutout in the series and, if I'm not mistaken, Vegas had zero PP goals. That's as much a function of poor play, bad luck (your go to) and random happenings (another one of your go tos) as much as how Montreal played-and the Habs played at 100% of their potential which is a huge credit to them.

The idea that players can't help a team win in the regular season, but magically can lift their games toa astounding heights in the playoffs is beyond silly. One might even say farcical.

Friedman says so much that I'm sure he covers all the angles just to maintain his overblown reputation. "If Dickey Dunn wrote it, it must be true", a great sage once said.

 

[Cyclones Rock]

I spent $600 on concert tickets yesterday, Montreal better win.

I think that the odds are stacked against them-as did whomever issued your bet-but they've been outperforming expectations since the playoffs began. Tampa will have all the pressure on them, except for those who have purchased overpriced concert tix

 

[Cyclones Rock]

I didn't pick the Habs to go this far either but I think it's remiss to say Vegas hit a slump and not say Carey price may have had a small role to play in that.

I give a ton of credit to the Habs. I also maintain the Vegas wasn't at their best. Teams go through lulls during the season and the SC tournament. Vegas was in one. Winnipeg was simply awful. I think the expected goals % in that series for Montreal was an all time playoff high. That's not just because one team was playing well. Toronto hasn't won a series since Lake Erie was a dew drop. The Leafs have serious issues.

When players are polled, Price always comes up as the best goaltender in the league. I guess they know what they're taking about.

 

[EspenK]

I spent $600 on concert tickets yesterday, Montreal better win.

What are the odds on Tampa Bay? Can you hedge to guarantee a win? Asking to keep you out of the poor house.

 

[EspenK]

So anything that doesn't single-handedly make the Jackets a good team is something we shouldn't do? I'm genuinely asking, it's complicated.

I just don't think throwing 5-6 years at 5+ million at a 28 year old is a smart strategy if you're rebuilding. He's a good player and anyone could use him, but is that the smartest use of cap space at the start of a rebuild?

If Jarmo thinks he can get this team competing in 2-3 years and believes Danault can be productive well into his early-mid 30s, then by all means. But I'm not sure of that myself.

Exhibit A why not to: Dubi & many others/ Exhibit A why to do it: Bergeron & others.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

this was just posted on the playoff board.........I mean.......Tampa are short-handed and have 7 on the ice

 

[majormajor]

A team which wins 24 of 56 games is not "built" for much of anything. The Devils won 3 Cups. This Habs team is a lot more likely to be like the 1982 Canucks and 1981 North Stars-mediocre teams who had a nice run and then got crushed in the finals by a vastly superior dynasty in the NY Islanders. Tampa vs. Montreal has the same feel.

If you don't think Winnipeg played like absolute rubbish vs. Montreal, I don't know what to say. Stone got shutout in the series and, if I'm not mistaken, Vegas had zero PP goals. That's as much a function of poor play, bad luck (your go to) and random happenings (another one of your go tos) as much as how Montreal played-and the Habs played at 100% of their potential which is a huge credit to them.

The idea that players can't help a team win in the regular season, but magically can lift their games toa astounding heights in the playoffs is beyond silly. One might even say farcical.

Friedman says so much that I'm sure he covers all the angles just to maintain his overblown reputation. "If Dickey Dunn wrote it, it must be true", a great sage once said.

You seem to struggle with this concept of two teams playing against each other. Yeah Stone suddenly can't score against Montreal when he's matched up against the best shutdown center in the NHL, imagine that!

Yes it's good luck as well as a playoff style roster, all of the above. I'm honestly surprised that the concept of a playoff style player is so new to you. Ben Chiarot might be exhibit A. Or maybe that's Corey Perry. Do you need it explained to you why they're better this time of year?